Lemons out of lemonade

But Jaskaran Gill‘s DUI helped prompt crime labs across California to finally modernize the way they did things.

About four years ago — while Gill was already on probation for drunken driving — the then-Santa Clara University law student got a second DUI in Santa Clara County.

Worried that the State Bar might deny him the right to practice law or significantly delay the start of his career, Gill claimed that his blood-alcohol level wasn’t really 0.14, as the Santa Clara County crime lab had reported in early 2010. The lab’s methodology was outdated, he claimed, rendering the test scientifically invalid and therefore not admissible as evidence in court. (see below for technical explanation)

Gill’s novel defense tactic failed, thanks to Deputy District Attorney Chris Boscia, who proved that Gill would be considered drunk even if the test had been performed using the more up-to-date procedure. The Santa Clara County lab updated its procedures right away.

Boscia then wrote a Santa Clara University law review article warning that drunken-driving prosecutions across California were vulnerable to similar legal challenges.

The good news is the labs have gotten the message and all upgraded their procedures, Boscia says. (see below for technical explanation)

As for Gill, the State Bar initially refused to license him to practice law.

Applicants must have “good moral character (let the lawyer jokes begin), and the “qualities of honesty…respect for and obedience to the law.” “Involvement in activity that constitutes an act of misconduct or an act of moral turpitude does not necessarily preclude an applicant from admission to practice law in California; however, an applicant who has committed such acts must demonstrate rehabilitation prior to receiving a positive moral character determination.”

After Gill was convicted and sentenced to 210 days in jail, he apparently worked hard to redeem himself, including volunteering full-time at one point for Mothers Against Drunk Driving.

He was admitted to the Bar in September and is listed as working in Contra Costa County. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment, so IA doesn’t know if he’s defending drunk drivers or what kind of law he’s practicing.

GEEK ALERT (skip this paragraph if you don’t care about the technical details): Much of the equipment used throughout the state had not been certified as accurate under international standards. The other problem was that a test result — for instance, Gill’s 0.14 blood-alcohol level — was really an estimate of the true value. It actually needs to include another calculation called the measure of uncertainty, which is somewhat like the margin of error in a poll.]]]]